A REVIEW OF RESEARCH DESIGNING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR RECOVERY FROM HOMELESSNESS

A REVIEW OF
RESEARCH
Prepared by Michael J. Berens
Orientation Report 01
DESIGNING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR
RECOVERY FROM HOMELESSNESS
Subject to DRH CC Attribution License

ORIENTATIONREPORT/AReviewofResearch
2
IN THIS
REPORT
Executive Summary
Introduction
Homeless and Homelessness
Designing for Homelessness
Research Findings
Overview
Issues related to design
Special populations
Overview
Aesthetics
Children & Youth
Crowding
Dignity & Independence
Empowerment & Personal Control
Environmental Control
Families
Function, Furnishings & Materials
Healing Environments
Purpose of this review
Scope of this review & topics researched
Criteria for considering research studies
Search methods for identiication
of research studies for this review
Limitations
8
9
11
13
14
15
16
19
20
21
21
22
24
5
5
6
6
7
4
5
8
13

3
Areas for Further Research
Design Guidelines and
Recommendations
Annotated Bibliography of Studies
Included in This Review
Home & Sense of Place
Order and Arrangement
Privacy
Safety & Security
Spatial Layout & Perceptions of Space
Trauma
Wayinding
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
33
35
37

4
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
This review of research was undertaken to identify, aggregate
and summarize known insights about how to design the
interiors of facilities for persons that have experienced mild or
major trauma, including but not limited to homelessness. It
focusesonthelocal,intimatelevelofhuman-builtenvironment
interaction that often is neglected in available guidelines and
literature.
Topics included fall into two major categories: (1) the efects
of the physical interior environment on persons that have
experienced trauma (e.g., psychological and psychosocial
impacts and interactions), and (2) aspects of the interior
physical environment found in housing and/or sheltering
environments for the homeless (e.g., space planning and
layouts, materiality (furnishings, ixtures, and equipment),
lighting, color, wayinding, design details and accessories
(art, plants, signage), and psychological aspects of space
perception. In addition, the needs of particular subpopulations
of homeless individuals (men, women, children and youth,
families, mentally ill, addiction/alcoholism or substance abuse,
veterans) were considered.
Designing interiors for homeless facilities presents several
challenges. The clientele to be served is widely diverse,
and their needs and issues are correspondingly various.
Complications such as trauma, mental illness, previous
institutional experiences, and substance use and abuse make
it diicult to predict how a particular individual will respond to
the physical environment of any given facility. The needs and
desires of the clientele are at times at odds with those of the
staf, volunteers and administrators who work in and maintain
the facilities. Funding and other resources often are extremely
limited.
Little research has been done to date on the impact of the built
environment on the homeless who use the facilities. However,
research, both quantitative and qualitative, in related areas
and on the homeless population can provide guidance to
designers as they seek to address the challenges mentioned
above. There is considerable overlap of issues and indings
within the body of research to make it possible to distill with
conidence some basic design themes or guiding principles.
The review of research presents indings from the literature
examined and, where applicable, points out practical
implications or applications for designers. These are
summarized at the end of the report.
Observations about areas for possible further research are
presented following the literature review.
An annotated bibliography of works consulted for this review
is appended to the report.

5
INTRODUCTION
Much has been written about the plight of the homeless,
their physical and psychological needs and trauma, and
the social services developed to address those needs,
including various forms of housing or shelter. Regarding
the latter, a substantial body of content exists that
addresses macro issues of this design sector, including
urban planning and siting issues and overall architectural
approaches, including types of structures and external
appearance. Little attention has been given to the interior
environment in any but the most general terms.
This review of research was undertaken to identify,
aggregate and summarize known insights about how
to design the interiors of facilities for persons that have
experienced mild or major trauma, including but not
limited to homelessness. It focuses on the local, intimate
level of human-built environment interaction that often
is neglected in available guidelines and literature.
Although this report draws mainly on primary research,
it aims to distill the practical implications of that research
in order to inform architects and interior designers that
are designing facilities for homeless persons, especially
those that are unfamiliar with this project sector and
this user type, as well as organizations that advocate
for the homeless and are building or renovating
facilities. It is hoped that it will also serve as an aid to
design researchers that wish to build their research
studies from the foundation of previous indings and to
design educators and design students that are creating
hypotheticalprojectresponsesand/oracademicresearch
in this project sector.
Purpose of this review
Scope of this review & topics
researched
As stated above, this review focuses on topics relevant
to the design of the interiors of facilities for persons
that have experienced mild or major trauma, with an
emphasis on facilities that serve the homeless. Aside
from providing a context for the issues and challenges
involvedinconstructingfacilitiesforthehomeless,itdoes
not seek to address macro housing issues, such as urban
planningorsitingoffacilities,architecturaldesign(except
as relates to interior architecture), or issues or behaviors
related to the exterior of facilities, such as landscaping,
gardens, courtyards, streets or public spaces.

6
Topics included fall into two major categories: (1) the
efects of the physical interior environment on persons
that have experienced trauma (e.g., psychological and
psychosocial impacts and interactions), and (2) aspects
of the interior physical environment found in housing
and/or sheltering environments for the homeless (e.g.,
space planning and layouts, materiality (furnishings,
ixtures, and equipment), lighting, color, wayinding,
design details and accessories (art, plants, signage), and
psychological aspects of space perception. In addition,
the needs of particular subpopulations of homeless
individuals (men, women, children and youth, families,
mentally ill, addiction/alcoholism or substance abuse,
veterans) were considered.
Since few studies directly address the interior design
of facilities for the homeless, research on physical
environments or services provided that are somewhat
analogous to facilities for the homeless in certain
respects (e.g., healthcare, retail services, prisons, senior
care facilities) were also consulted.
For the most part, the review examines the indings from
peer-reviewed primary research, both quantitative and
qualitative, or literature reviews of such research on the
topics listed above. Particular consideration was given
to studies that provided indings that had practical or
readily applicable implications for designers. A few more
theoretical and some general articles, both academic and
popular, were included that help to lay the groundwork
or provide context for the topics under review.
Case studies and post-occupancy evaluations were
excluded as a rule; however, because of the paucity
of interior design research on these topics as regards
facilities for the homeless, a few case studies that provide
substantial interior design details have been referenced
as an aid to designers.
Books were included only if they provided additional
information not covered in the articles, as they often
contain material not formally peer-reviewed, but
chapters of editions comprised of individually peer-
reviewed studies were consulted.
An extensive online search was conducted using
Google and Google Scholar, employing search terms
derived from the topics under review. In addition, the
bibliographies from highly relevant sources and a search
of the database EBSCOHost Connections employing the
tag“homeless shelters”were also used. More than 1,000
citations were investigated to glean the nearly 140 items
included in the inal selected annotated bibliography
appended to this report.
Criteria for considering research
studies for this review
Search methods for identiication of
research studies for this review

7
Although every efort was made to make a thorough and
comprehensive investigation of the existing, accessible
literature pertinent to the purpose and goals of this
study, the following review is by no means exhaustive.
A number of other studies make mention of the impact
of the physical environment on individuals who have
experienced trauma and/or homelessness, but in passing
and to no great extent, as it is not the focus of their
research, and many refer to the same primary or seminal
studies without adding to their indings. In addition, only
a handful of the numerous psychological and psycho-
social studies on trauma and homelessness of interest to
social services providers have been included; only those
that were deemed most germane to the present study.
Practitioners may regret the absence of case studies and
post-occupancy evaluations or coverage of architectural
design, but for reasons stated above those fell outside
the scope of this study.
Limitations

8
HOMELESS AND
HOMELESSNESS
Homelessness, for the purposes of this report, refers to
the state of persons who lack shelter suitable for human
habitation or are temporarily residing in an emergency
shelter or transitional housing program. Individuals
may be homeless by “choice” (in that they prefer not to
reside in the living conditions or shelter options available
them) or due to circumstances beyond their control,
including poverty, unemployment or low-paying jobs;
lack of available afordable housing; fear of physical,
psychological or sexual abuse; mental health issues,
including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); and
alcoholism, drug addiction, or other substance abuse.
Homelessness cuts across every segment of American
society: men, women, children, families, the employed
and the unemployed, retirees, veterans, and others of all
ages, backgrounds, race and ethnicity.
According to the most recent national estimate of
homelessness in the United States, from January 2014,
578,424 people were expe¬riencing homelessness
(National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2015). Despite
the fact that the number of homeless individuals has
recently decreased nationwide, homelessness remains
a major social challenge in many states and larger cities
across the country. In its most recent annual survey,
the U.S. Conference of Mayors Task Force on Hunger
and Homelessness (2015) reports the total number of
homeless persons increased across 22 cities surveyed
by an average of 1.6 percent between September 1,
2014 and August 31, 2015, with 58 percent of the survey
cities reporting an increase, and 42 percent reporting a
decrease.
Federal funding to address homelessness is at its highest
level in history ($4.5 billion in iscal year 2015); eforts to
provide shelter have substantially increased in recent
years (there are currently more than 3,700, according to
HomelessShelterDirectory.org); and as many as one third
of all homeless persons are unsheltered (e.g., living on
the street or in a car or abandoned building) at any given
time (National Alliance to End Homelessness, 2015). Yet,
demand for temporary shelter continues to outstrip
availability:
• From 2007 to 2014, the number of emergency
shelter beds [nationwide] . . . increased by 18
percent . . . . In this same time period, the number of
transitional housing beds decreased by 17 percent.
. . . Nationally, the system capacity could assist 73
percent of the total homeless population on a
Overview

9
single night in January 2014; however,
geographic and population mismatches may
prevent every bed from being illed. (National
Alliance to End Homelessness, 2015, pg. 55).
• Across the cities over the past year, an average of
25 percent of the demand for emergency shelter is
estimated to have gone unmet. Because no beds
were available, emergency shelters in 76 percent of
the survey cities had to turn away homeless families
with children. Shelters in 61 percent of the cities
had to turn away unaccompanied individuals. (U.S.
Conference of Mayors Task Force on Hunger and
Homelessness, 2015, pg. 2).
As these igures attest, there is an immediate need to
increase the availability of shelters and transitional
housing for the homeless. In addition, as Davis (2004)
and others have pointed out, the conditions and
physical environments of many existing facilities are
ill-suited to meet the needs of the populations they
seek to serve. Architects and designers can make a
valuable contribution to improving the quality of life
for the homeless by applying their talents, knowledge
and experience toward designing, building and/or
renovating these much-needed facilities. Based on his
review of recent projects to innovate shelter design,
Wasmer (2005) observes, “Designers have the ability to
generate a new identity for homeless because they can
design a variety of shelters that promote and project
individuality, self-suiciency and dignity.”
Many in the architecture and design community have
undertaken shelter and other facilities projects for the
homeless, both for hire and pro bono. More would do
so but have expressed that it can be diicult to locate
information that would help them design homelessness
physical facilities. This report is intended to be a irst step
toward providing that information as culled from existing
research.
Designing facilities for the homeless presents a special
challenge because of the diversity of the population
and of their experiences and needs. Moreover, funding
and other resources needed to address those and the
competing, if not conlicting, design requirements of
the staf and volunteers who manage and work in the
facilities are usually scarce. This section sets forth major
design-related issues that will be examined in more detail
in the body of the report.
Safety and Privacy. Of particular importance to
the design of interiors for these facilities is accounting for
the high incidence of trauma in this population. The U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Administration (SAMHSA) has
developed the following deinition of trauma derived
from a number sources:
Issues related to design

10
• Individual trauma results from an event, series of
events, or set of circumstances that is experienced by
an individual as physically or emotionally harmful or
life threatening and that has lasting adverse efects
on the individual’s functioning and mental, physical,
social, emotional, or spiritual well-being. (SAMHSA,
2014, pg. 6)
Being homeless, with its accompanying dangers and
stresses, is itself traumatic. Add to that, many homeless
individuals are without a home because of previous
traumatic events in their lives. They may be victims of
domestic violence, physical, psychological and/or sexual
abuse. They may have sufered a life-altering crisis, been
institutionalized, or have some form of emotional or
mental debility. In the case of homeless veterans, they
may be experiencing PTSD or other combat-related
trauma. Theymayabusealcoholordrugsasawaytocope
with their trauma. Often, trauma begins in childhood or
youth, and its efects are exacerbated by other traumatic
events and their consequences over a period of many
years.
Traumatized individuals, understandably, are fearful
of others and institutions. Safety, privacy and self-
preservation are of utmost importance. Designers need
to create spaces that are welcoming, demonstrate a
safe environment, and provide some degree of privacy,
while at the same time not interfering with staf’s need
to monitor residents’behavior. Gender privacy is a crucial
issue in facilities that provide services to both sexes and
families.
Control. Of particular importance to the design
of interiors for these facilities is accounting for the
high incidence of trauma in this population. The U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Administration (SAMHSA)
has developed the following deinition of trauma
derived Because their own resources are scant, the
homeless depend on others for their survival, be they
government services, nonproit services, religious
and other charitable organizations, or strangers. That
dependency can undermine their sense of dignity and
deepen their feelings of helplessness and resentment.
Providing means of personal control in the physical
environment (e.g., the ability to rearrange furniture) has
great symbolic and psychological signiicance, as well as
practical beneit. Such choices, however, must take into
account the need to balance personal independence
with the comfort and safety of other residents.
Durability and Maintenance. Like other
institutional settings, design of facilities for the homeless
must take into account many practical considerations,
suchasmaintenanceanddurabilityofmaterials. Facilities
usually must be thoroughly cleaned each day, so ease of
maintenanceisessentialforbusystaf. Furnitureandbeds
must be durable to withstand heavy use and cleaning,
as well as occasional outbursts and altercations that may

11
occur among residents, particularly those with mental
health or substance abuse issues. At the same time, the
environment must be comfortable so that residents can
relax and sleep in order to recover from the stresses they
encounter every day.
Storage. Although they have no permanent home,
the homeless have belongings. Often they carry with
them all their personal possessions, including important
documents and records, photographs and other
memorabilia, cash or food stamps or vouchers, and, in
some cases, drugs and drug paraphernalia. Residents
need a place where they can store and securely lock up
theirbelongingsovernightand,dependingonthefacility,
during the day when they are outside the shelter. Given
that space is at a premium and budgets for furniture is
minimal, designers must ind creative solutions for secure
storage.
Multi-use. Homeless facilities often serve multiple
purposes: a place to get a meal; a place to shower and
wash clothes; a place to sleep; a place to get counseling,
employment assistance and other social services; and a
place to ind refuge from life on the street. Spaces need
to be designed and furnished for reception and intake;
oices and rooms for staf; food preparation and dining;
dormitories; showers, sinks and toilets; and possibly a TV
or recreation area and/or library, computer and Internet
stations, laundry facilities, medical attention, and a play
area for children. Designers, consequently, need some
familiarity with a variety of design specialties, including
residential, oice, hospitality, and even institutional and
healthcare.
Both as a group and within subgroups, the homeless are
highly diverse:
• The largest subpopulation experiencing
homelessness [in 2014] was individuals, comprising
almost 63 percent (362,163 people) of all homeless
people. About 37 percent were people in families
(216,261 people in 67,513 households). Individuals
who were chronically homeless represented
almost 15 percent (84,291 people) of the homeless
population, while people in chronically homeless
families made up approximately 3 percent (15,143
people) of the homeless population. About 9 percent
(49,933 people) of the homeless population was
made up of veterans. Unaccompanied youth and
children accounted for 7.8 percent (45,205 people) of
the total homeless population. (National Alliance to
End Homelessness, pg. 7).
• The survey cities reported that on average, 29
percent of homeless adults were severely mentally
ill, 22 percent were physically disabled, 18 percent
were employed, 17 percent were victims of domestic
violence, 12 percent were veterans, and 4 percent
were HIV Positive. (U.S. Conference of Mayors Task
Force on Hunger and Homelessness, pg. 2).
Special populations

12
Women comprise about 10 percent of the homeless
population. An estimated 6 percent of the homeless
is age 62 or over (Oice of Community Planning and
Development, HUD, 2014, Part 2, pg. 1-8).
There is a great deal of overlap among these categories.
For example, women make up about 8 percent of
homeless veterans (Women’s Bureau, 2014, pg. 8). Many
homeless veterans are disabled or sufer from some
form of mental disability. Most homeless families are
comprised of single women with two or three children
(Bassuk & Rubin, 1987); many of these women have led
domestic violence or sexual abuse. Homeless children
and youth often have been the victims of physical or
sexual abuse, as well. Chronically homeless individuals
and victims of abuse are more likely to abuse alcohol,
drugs and other substances.
Each of these subgroups has speciic needs with
implications for design. These are addressed in more
detail in the body of the report.

13
DESIGNING FOR HOMELESSNESS
RESEARCH FINDINGS
Given the limited availability of funding to address
the needs of the homeless, it is perhaps not surprising
that very little research has been done on the interior
physical environment of homeless facilities. Of the 135
publications examined for this report, only two (Pable,
2012; Pable and Fishburne, 2014) report on research
conducted on the interior design of homeless facilities.
One (Potthof, Chinucos, & Rosenberg, 1997) examined
the interior design preferences of women in alcohol and
drug treatment centers. Seven others (Berens, 2014;
Bridgman, 2003; Ciao and Grossberg, 2009; Davis, 2004;
Farmer, 2009; Pable, 2005; and Wasmer, 2005) present
case studies. However, other detail can be drawn from
qualitative studies (interviews and surveys) conducted
with homeless shelter residents in which the physical
environment is referred to, even though it was not the
primary focus of the research.
Furthermore, many of the issues related to the impact
of the physical environment of homeless facilities
on homeless persons and service delivery – such as
crowding, wayinding, stress, privacy, and control – are
similar to those in other environments for which we do
have quantitative as well as qualitative research. This
evidence-based information can help inform design
strategies and solutions for shelters, transitional housing,
and other homeless facilities.
Practitioners must also take into consideration the
transitorynatureofthispopulationandthepsychological
and emotional state of homeless individuals. As Pable
and Fishburne observe,
• Psychological constructs related to homeless shelter
environments may be much diferent than constructs
held by residents regarding a typical home, as
residents of transitional-style shelters may stay there
for only three months to a year. Emergency shelter
stays may be further limited to a day or several
months. Shelter constructs are also unique because
shelter residents are often in mental and sometimes
physical crisis when they get there, and thus may
have signiicant questions about their identity,
purpose, and worth. (2014, pp. 2-3).
Understanding how the physical environment afects
an individual’s sense of identity, worth, dignity, and
empowerment is essential to designing supportive and
healing environments for trauma-experienced residents
or clients.
Overview

14
By examining both the research on the built environment
and the psycho-social research, we arrive at a more
comprehensive and complete picture of the issues
involved in designing facilities for the homeless and
efective strategies and solutions for addressing them.
Because issues and needs vary with each particular
facility and the population(s) it serves, the following
topics have been arranged alphabetically to avoid any
implied or inferred order of priority or importance.
Aesthetics often are an afterthought or of secondary
concern in the design of facilities for the homeless as
a matter of practicality. Funding is limited, and out of
necessity or policy administrators and facility managers
may opt for an institutional approach to the interior
(Davis, 2004). During the programming phase for the
design of a homeless shelter dormitory station, for
example, staf commented to Kratzer (2014) that the
stations were not to be “too nice,” or else residents may
not want to leave (pg. 530).
Yet, as numerous studies have shown, aesthetics have
a profound efect on the mood and well being of
occupants. Vischer (2007) notes, “Architectonic details,
which include colors and decoration, signage, artwork
and design details, convey meaning and can have
symbolic signiicance that afects people emotionally”
(pg. 179). Ciao and Grossberg discuss the challenges
of “employing the politics of shape, scale, material
and color to transform a dismal, leftover space [a clinic
for the homeless run out of a church basement] into a
comfortable and inviting environment for users and staf
alike.”
In evaluating the efects of physical surroundings
on service encounters, Bitner (1990) showed that an
agency that was perceived as pleasant, beautiful, well
kept, above average, neat, calming, eicient, etc.,
was considered more professional, believable and
ofering a higher level of customer service in handling
a customer complaint than one which was perceived as
disorganized, unpleasant, etc. Similarly, Orth and Wirtz
(2014) concluded from their study of interior service
environments that visual complexity reduces a service
environment’s attractiveness. Visual complexity was
determined by factors such as the irregularity, detail,
dissimilarity, and quantity of objects; the asymmetry and
irregularity of their arrangement; and the variations in
color and contrast.
It is well documented that color afects mood and task
performance (see Dilani (2009), pp. 61-62). Studies have
shown that warm colors (red, orange, yellow) can cause
arousal, while cool colors (blue, green, purple) have a
calming efect. Raybeck (1991), for instance, advises to
avoid the use of arousing colors in conined spaces to
help reduce feelings of crowdedness. Color impacts the
perception of the physical environment in many other
ways, as well. Zavotka and Teaford (1997) found that use
Aesthetics

15
of more familiar colors (i.e., those they had in their own
homes) in assisted living facilities for older adults helped
them to feel more “at home” by relating the new space
to past experiences. Light-colored rooms help to make
a space seem less crowded than do dark-colored rooms
(Baum, 1967). Homeless residents responding to a needs
survey said that more colorful rooms made them feel
safer (Kratzer). In their study of residential alcohol drug
treatment centers for women, Potthof, et al. learned
that residents objected to stark white walls, which they
considered sterile and unfeminine, and preferred more
feminine colors instead, such as soft white, peach or light
rose (pg. 254), which made them feel more comfortable
and respected.
Art, like color, performs multiple functions in how the
physical environment afects occupants. Besides adding
visual interest, art can convey meaning and symbolic
signiicance. Itcandoubleasanaturalview. Artcancreate
a visual distraction that helps to alleviate stress (Bishop,
2011), as well as improve mood, comfort and customer
satisfaction (Karnik, Printz, & Finkel, 2014). Potthof, et al.
found providing residents in alcohol and drug treatment
centers with a corkboard on which they could attach
pictures and photographs made them feel more at
home, thus increasing their likelihood of remaining in
the program and receptiveness to treatment.
Plants, too, are both decorative and salutary. They can
perform an important biophilic function by connecting
occupants to the natural world, which has been found to
reduce stress and pain and to improve mood (van den
Berg, 2005). Lewis’s review of research (1994) indicated
that settings that include vegetation reduce stress,
promote peace, tranquility, enhanced self-esteem, and
a sense of mastery of the environment. Lohr, Pearson-
Mims, & Goodwin (1996) reported that when plants
were added to a windowless computer lab on a college
campus, participants were less stressed (measured by
blood pressure) and more productive. Dijkstra, Pieterse,
& Pruyn (2008) similarly concluded that the presence
of indoor plants in a hospital room reduced stress by
enhancing the perceived attractiveness of the room. A
literature review of research revealed mixed indings on
the psychological beneits of indoor plants, including
emotional states, pain perception, creativity, task-
performance, and indices of autonomic arousal; however,
repeated indings indicate plants can be beneicial to
pain management (Bringslimark, Hatig, & Patil, 2009).
Homeless children and youth fall into two categories,
individuals and those who are members of a homeless
family. While similar in some respects, each group also
has speciic needs and psycho-social issues that must be
taken into consideration.
Pearce (1995) and Oliveira and Burke (2009) each
conducted research on solitary homeless children and
adolescents, with similar results and conclusions. Their
work shows homeless youth have a high degree of
Children and Youth

16
trauma. They are, as Pearce states, “casualties of larger
social problems, including substance abuse, poverty,
physical and emotional neglect, and physical or sexual
abuse” (pg. 1). Because of their fear of adults, they are
reluctant to access social services and prefer to live on
the street or in abandoned buildings than go to a shelter.
Life on the street often leads to petty crime, alcohol and
drug use and traicking, and selling sexual favors. Some
of these individuals may eventually wind up in juvenile
detention facilities, group homes, youth hostels, state
hospitals, or treatment facilities for adolescent substance
abusers. They tend to cycle in and out of life on the street
and life in an institution of some sort. Although they are
forced by circumstance to develop survival skills, many
have diiculty coping with their situation, deepening
their trauma. Neiman (1988), who conducted a review on
research on resiliency in homeless children, concludes,
“Clearly children cannot be abused and neglected for
long periods of time and remain resilient”(pg. 24).
Children living in homeless shelters or transitional
housingwithoneorbothparentsandoftenothersiblings
have a diferent set of issues. Bassuk and Rubin (1987)
analyzed data on preschool and school age children
that revealed a majority were sufering developmental
delays, severe anxiety and depression, and learning
diiculties. Approximately half of the sheltered homeless
children required psychiatric referral and evaluation.
Parlakian (2010) explores some of the ways that schools
and social services can address the developmental needs
of children in homeless families.
A qualitative study of children living in homeless shelters
found that the children had diferent attitudes toward life
in the shelter depending on their previous experience of
home (Penuei & Davey, 1999). Some found the shelter
unsatisfactory compared to their idea of home; some
considered it an in-between stop until the family could
get a home; and some considered it their home. The
authors conclude, “Spaces for homeless children, and
perhaps for the rest of us, are relational; that is, they are
understood in terms of other spaces and the comforts,
privacy, and meaning those spaces hold for children.
. . . depending on the conditions of the shelter, the
experience of families before becoming homeless, and
children’s conceptions of ideal home spaces”(pg. 233).
Because the number of facilities and beds available in
any one location is limited, and shelters typically employ
dormitory style or open-plan layouts, high levels of social
density are a common occurrence in facilities for the
homeless. This can create a sense of perceived crowding,
which has been found to have deleterious efects if
prolonged.
Research on crowding and proxemics (i.e., personal
closeness) distinguishes between social density, which is
determinedbythenumberofindividualsinagivenspace,
and crowding, which is an emotional and psychological
reaction to social density (see, for example, Schmidt &
Crowding

17
Keating, 1979; Karlin, 1980; Bordas-Astudillo, Moch,
& Hermand, 2003). Schmidt and Keating employ a
somewhat broad deinition, contending that crowding
results when a level of social stimulation occurs that is
greater than that desired by the individual. Based on a
review of research to date, Karlin deduces that crowding
is perceived when one’s goal is blocked. This may be
caused by lack of privacy, extremely close proxemic
interaction, or resource scarcity (i.e., insuicient space /
congestion). If a solution is not forthcoming as a result
of similarities in the composition of the crowd, learned
behavior or cultural factors, says Karlin, individuals will
either try to escape from the situation or try to change it.
If both are inconvenient or impossible, negative efects
will occur (pg. 242).
Among other efects, crowding is a stressor (Aiello, 1975;
Baum & Valins, 1979; Evans, 1979; Inman & Sinn, 1987;
Winchip, Inman, & Curtis Dunn, 1988). Baum and Valins
(1974, 1979), in their studies of students in campus
residence halls, found that perceived crowding led to
avoidance behaviors and diminished ability to cope
in social settings, and that these efects persisted even
outside the residence hall environment. However, Zanter
(1980), who also studied students in residence halls,
found physical and social environment afected physical
and mental health more than density, and that, contrary
to expectations, isolation can be just as damaging as
crowding.
According to Evans, Lercher, and Koler (2002), there is
good support for the claim that higher levels of interior
residential density (people per room) are associated with
elevated levels of psychological distress among adults.
Their study showed it had a similar afect on children.
McCain, Cox, Paulus, and Karlovac (1991) studied social
density and crowding among prisoners. They posit,
“All other factors being equal, the degree of social
disorganization is positively related to the degree of
observed negative efects associated with housing
conditions” (pg. 3) – most likely (1) when a group of
strangers is brought together, (2) when the number of
individuals is too large to constitute a single cohesive
group, and (3) when there is a high incidence of strange
individuals introduced into a group or constant change
of individuals within group formation-- all of which are
common occurrences in facilities for the homeless.
Because a sense crowding or being crowded relates to
perception and state of mind, it can be triggered by a
numberoffactors.Inanotherstudyofcampusdormitories,
Kaya (2001) found perception of room size and crowding
were inluenced by social factors, including relations
with other residents and with roommates, and personal
characteristics, such as sex, family size, and personal
background including the number of people sharing
a bedroom at one’s home, and whether the individual
stays alone or shares a bedroom with others. Aiello and
Thompson (1980) discovered that perceived crowding is
also culturally determined by one’s expectations about
size of spaces and social density. Studies in children have
shown perceived crowding and responses to it also difer
by gender – girls more readily perceive crowding than do
boys (Murray, 1974; Lowry, 1993). Zanter similarly found

18
female students coped better living alone than did male
students.
Perceived crowding can result when an individual feels
they have little or no control over their social interactions
(Baum & Valins, 1974), such as having to share sleeping
quarters, encountering a number of strangers, or waiting
in line for a service. Providing some degree of choice
or perceived control can help to alleviate the sense of
crowding (Schmidt & Keating; Hui & Bateson, 1991).
In addition, a number of studies have investigated
the efects of the physical environment on perceived
crowding. They indicate strategies and solutions
designers can employ to help mitigate, mediate or
alleviate the sense of crowding:
• Baum (1976) found light-colored rooms were
perceived as less crowded than were dark-colored
rooms. Visual complexity (paintings) can serve as a
distraction from perceived crowding.
• Anantha (1991) found more open spaces alleviate the
sense of crowding but are not always feasible due to
building constraints. Two other strategies, increasing
partitioning and decreasing illumination, also were
efective in reducing perceptions of crowding and
the resulting sense of stress and discomfort.
• Evans, Lepore, & Schroeder (1996) conclude persons
living in homes with greater depth appear to be
bufered from some of the harmful psychological
health efects of crowding. In addition, room
brightness, subunit size, degree of private enclosure,
as well as structural depth, may inluence human
responses to crowding. Sound attenuation, visual
access and exposure, window views, and proximity
to open spaces are some potential interior design
elements warranting further exploration.
• Laughead (1999) found no evidence that ambient
illumination levels afected perceived crowding.
Other factors – proximity to others, presence of
tables (assuming they hold reading materials), and a
view of the entire space – were found to have more
efect.
• Kaya (2001) found that rooms on higher loors in a
high-rise building were perceived as less crowded.
Analysis of self-reported mental wellbeing data by Evans,
Lercher, & Koler (2002) indicates that high density in row
houses may also be harmful to children. High-density
living will be better tolerated when children live in
smaller dwellings, preferably detached units; when they
have a room of their own or at least a designated play
space where they can be alone; when their residence is
designed in such a way as to minimize uncontrollable
social interactions; and when loor plan layouts provide
better separation of rooms from one another.

19
Both the events that lead to homelessness and the
conditions in which the homeless live can undermine
their sense of dignity, autonomy, independence, and
self-determination. Often, these feelings are reinforced
and exacerbated by their encounters with social
service agencies and other providers of services to the
homeless. After reviewing more than 500 interviews
between homeless individuals and service providers,
Hofman and Cofey (2008) found that the homeless
individuals frequently experienced objectiication and
infantilization, which resulted in their becoming angry
and avoiding further encounters with such agencies.
Miller and Keys (2001) likewise distilled eight types of
events that sustained dignity, such as being cared for by
staf and having resources available to meet basic needs,
and eight types of events were found that undermine
dignity, such as being yelled at or insulted by staf
persons and having staf use rules in an excessive and
arbitrary way.
Paradis, et al. (2011) reviewed practices in Canada’s
social service services aimed at promoting the dignity,
autonomy and self-determination of women and families
facing homelessness. The most efective were involving
clientsindesigninganddeliveringpoliciesandprograms;
promoting their strengths, skills, sense of self-reliance,
and mutual support; and respecting and responding to
diverse needs, experiences and identities.
No individual studies of the impact of the physical
environment on dignity were found. However, since
dignity and autonomy are closely related to perceived
control, ofering more control over the physical
environment can help increase sense of self worth
(Clarke, 2009; Pable, 2012). Clarke articulates the
principle that design should enable and maintain the
dignity of patients in healthcare environments (or other
traumatic environments). He lists eight areas where
he believes designers could help to enhance dignity
through changes to the physical environment:
• Reduce or remove known adverse stimuli
• Reduce or remove environmental stressors
• Engage the individual actively in a dynamic, multi-
sensory environment
• Provide ways for the individual to exhibit their self-
reliance (ability to do things for himself or herself)
• Provide and promote connectedness to the natural
world
• Separate the individual from others who may be in
distress
• Reinforce the individual’s sense of personal identity
• Promote the opportunity for choice
Dignity & Independence

20
Empowerment is directly related to dignity and sense
of control. Empowerment means self-determination,
which in turn means the exercise of control (Ware, et
al., 1992). Zimmerman (1990) distinguishes between
two types of empowerment, political and psychological:
“an empowered person may have no real power in
the political sense, but may have an understanding of
what choices can be made in diferent situations. . . .
Empowered individuals may not always make the best
(or correct) choices, but they may know that they can
choose whether to ight or retreat, to be dependent or
independent, and to organize or wait. . . . Ultimately,
psychological empowerment is a contextual construct
that requires an ecological analysis of individual
knowledge, decision-making processes, and person-
environment it”(pp. 174-175).
Individuals or groups feel politically empowered when
they are actively engaged in a decision-making process
that afects them (Feldman & Westphal, 1999) and when
they perceive that everyone concerned has a voice in
the process (Comerio, 1987). Feldman and Westphal
observe: “Empowerment is developed through an
ongoing, accumulative process: experience builds up
through repetitive cycles of action and relection, which
help people cultivate individual and collective skills and
resources that help them efect positive changes in their
environments and lives”(pg. 34). Goering, Durbin,Trainor,
and Paduchak (1990) state that consumer involvement
in planning and governing the residence is essential to
the success of developing housing for the homeless.
Paradis, et al. found that this type of empowerment
helped enhance homeless women’s sense of dignity
and self-determination. Interestingly, Liu, et al. (2009)
found that being homeless did not afect men’s sense
of their masculinity. Tang’s observations of the behavior
of residents at two homeless shelters in Oahu revealed
residents used diferent types of strategies with the staf
to maintain their sense of dignity and empowerment,
principally, anger and avoidance behavior or friendliness
and ingratiation.
Ware, et al. encouraged mentally ill homeless persons to
transitiontoanindependentlivingsituationbybolstering
their sense of psychological empowerment. Tenants
set house rules on a number of fundamental issues and
were gradually expected to assume control over other
decisions. They also were urged to do for themselves the
tasks that formerly required help from residential staf.
No individual studies on the efects of the physical
environment on empowerment were found. Pable
(2012) in part investigated whether an altered shelter
can be assistive toward eventual empowerment. Based
on the subjects’remarks about having more control over
aspects of their environment that gave them more choice
and privacy, she concluded, “This study’s results suggest
that providing parents with a sense of control over their
personal environments may serve to enhance their sense
of personal empowerment”(pg. 32).
Empowerment & Personal Control

21
Homelessness, especially when precipitated by
circumstances outside of one’s control, like the loss of a
job or an eviction, instills a sense of helplessness and loss
of control. Overcoming that sense of helplessness and
ineicacy is a crucial step toward breaking the cycle of
homelessness (Swick, 2005). One way designers can aid
residents of homeless shelters and transitional housing
to regain their sense of eicacy is to provide options that
allow them some control over the physical environment.
Pable (2012) adapted a bedroom in a shelter for homeless
families so as to increase the residents’ environmental
control(e.g.,puttingalockonthedoor,providingcontrols
for lighting and a fan, adding bed curtains and moveable
furnishings). A post-occupancy evaluation showed
the residents frequently used the controls and had a
higher level of satisfaction with their living arrangement.
Moreover, exercising control increased the subject’s
sense of empowerment as well as well-being. Similarly,
apartments that make up the transitional housing that
forms part of Bud Clark Commons in Portland, Ore., are
designed to be easily adaptable so each resident can
personalize certain aspects, like furniture arrangement
and color, thus adding to their sense of empowerment
and of having their own home (Berens, 2014).
Analogously, Veitch (1996) reports that awarding
subjects the lighting of their choice to perform a
delegated task gave them a greater sense of control.
Lee and Brand (2005) found that giving employees more
control over the physical workspace led to perceived
group cohesiveness and higher job satisfaction. Raybeck
concludes that providing more personal control over
objects and elements of space in conined environments
will help reduce perceived crowding and its negative
efects.
Ulrich (1991) posited that designing healthcare
environments to foster a sense of control with respect
to physical-social surroundings would reduce stress
and promote wellness. By the same token, Vischer
determined that placing demands on employees while
not allowing them control over their physical work
environment induced stress.
In regards to facilities staf and volunteers, Davis
(1984) presents a model for assessing how physical
environments (in this case, oice environments) afect
behavior in terms of physical structure, physical stimuli
and symbolic artifacts in order to facilitate managers’
ability to supervise their employees. The ability to
control or remove certain physical stimuli (e.g., ringing
telephones, a clock on the wall, piles of paperwork, the
smell of cofee) helped to eliminate distractions that
afected employees’concentration and productivity.
Up until recently, families (typically, but not exclusively, a
single mother with two or three children, one or more of
which is of school age) were among the fastest growing
populations of homeless. This led to the creation of
Environmental Control
Families

22
facilities expressly designed to meet the needs of families
or of separate areas for families in facilities originally
designed only for adults. Homelessness is especially
traumatic and stressful for families (Swick, 2005). Lindsey
(1998) reports that life in the shelters sometimes helped
to bring families closer together emotionally, but that
policies and routines in the shelters often disrupted their
roles as disciplinarians and providers / caretakers.
Pable (2012) conducted a case study using a design
intervention (see the section on Environmental Control,
above) to investigate whether providing greater control
over the physical environment would improve living
conditions and choice for homeless families, particularly
the parent. She concluded, “The indings of the study
point to the potential beneits of the altered bedroom
that extend beyond the expected positive reaction to its
recent renovation”(pg. 32).
Davis (2004) notes that some shelters have day rooms
where parents who are waiting for assistance can be
with their children. Sometimes they provide both a
quiet room and a room for conversation, and possibly a
separate play area. Shelters that serve families usually
have sleeping quarters for families separate from single
men and single women.
In their study of the design of public restroom facilities,
Anthony and Dufresne (2007) provide several examples
of well designed family restrooms: “Family restrooms
can have multiple unisex toilet rooms within them,
but may also have space allocated for other amenities
and often share a common hand-washing and diaper-
changing area. In addition, upscale family facilities may
include family lounges, private nursing rooms, and baby
changing areas”(pg. 283).
Up until recently, families (typically, but not exclusively, a
single mother with two or three children, one or more of
which is of school age) were among the fastest growing
populations of homeless. This led to the creation of
facilities expressly designed to meet the needs of families
or of separate areas for families in facilities originally
designed only for adults. Homelessness is especially
traumatic and stressful for families (Swick, 2005). Lindsey
(1998) reports that life in the shelters sometimes helped
to bring families closer together emotionally, but that
policies and routines in the shelters often disrupted their
roles as disciplinarians and providers / caretakers.
As mentioned in the Overview to this section, facilities
for the homeless perform multiple functions, each of
which may require diferent design approaches and
solutions. Bud Clark Commons in Portland, Ore., for
example, includes separate waiting and intake areas, job
counseling and placement services, showers and lockers,
a dining facility, rooms for social service counseling, and
oices for staf, plus transitional housing apartments,
with separate ingress and egress for the services areas
and the living quarters (Berens, 2014). Little research
exists on function and functionality in facilities for the
homeless, however.
Function, Furnishings & Materials

23
Tips for shelter design ofered by homeless persons and
shelter staf gathered by Pable (2005) in her qualitative
research include: Ofer an ironclad way of keeping one’s
place in line that does not necessarily require physically
standing in it. For safety, strategically orient seating so
users are facing out from sheltering walls. Think carefully
about spatial volumes that may be over-whelming;
provide “retreat” spaces. Balconies can be an aesthetic
addition to a build¬ing, but they may also invite suicide
attempts. Separate restrooms for staf should be
provided.
Interviews conducted by Pable and Fishburne with
homeless shelter residents revealed how residents
perceive their room’s size or its furniture, the presence or
absence of privacy, how they can or cannot store their
possessions, and how they are permitted or hindered
from displaying objects that support their identities can
positively or negatively afect their state of mind.
Davis (2004) mentions the need for separate showering
and sleeping arrangements for single men, single
women, and families. Mottet and Ohle (2006) point out
that many shelters are physically unsafe for transgender
people and fail to provide adequate protections for their
privacy. Their recommendations for improving shelters
for transgender people include design elements for the
lobby and intake areas, restroom and shower privacy,
and sleeping arrangements.
Davis (2004), Pable and Fishburne (2012), Potthof, et al.,
and Pothukuchi (2003) all mention the need for adequate
storage space. Storage needs be lockable. In addition,
there is a need for closet space big enough to hang shirts,
trousers, skirts or dresses without wrinkling them.
Guthrie & O’Donnell (n.d.) state that noise control is
a key element in providing trauma-informed care for
female veterans. Choice of looring, wallcoverings,
window treatments, and furniture can afect noise
levels, especially as dormitory and other areas often
are intentionally designed without a top or cover for
purposes of monitoring residents (Davis, 2004).
Materialityisanareatodatelackinginresearch. Although
some authors refer in passing to the importance of
materials selection, no speciic studies were found during
this review. Davis (2004) has a short section on materials
that focuses mainly on construction materials. He does
note, “Solid-color cushions show dirt and stains more
readily than do bright patterns”(pg. 103). In addition, he
mentions that furniture made of solid wood or covered
with loor linoleum has been expressly created for
shelters, as have some beds that include storage. Pable
(2005), however, mentions bedroom furniture should
not be constructed of wood as bedbugs can burrow into
the wood grain and become impossible to eradicate.
Potthof, et al. provide a list of suggestions, including
furnishings and furniture, for the design of alcohol and
drug treatment centers for women, which usually involve
longer stays and more time spent in counseling and
treatment.

24
Little attention has been given to sustainability in
the design of most facilities. Bud Clark Commons
incorporates daylighting and nature views, as well as
environmentally friendly or sustainable furnishings
and materials (Berens, 2014). Farmer (2009) reports on
the Bridge, a modern homeless shelter in downtown
Dallas, which incorporates a number of sustainability
features, including a green-roof dining area, substantial
daylighting, and a graywater system.
Homeless individuals have physical, mental and
emotional health issues that can be afected positively
or negatively by their physical surroundings. Facilities for
the homeless can help address these issues by employing
the strategies and solutions developed to foster healing
environments in the healthcare arena.
Based on his previous work on the impact of the physical
environment and stress (Ulrich, et al., 1991; Ulrich,
1999), Ulrich (2001) has set forth a Theory of Supportive
Healthcare Design that posits design of healthcare
environments can promote healing by eliminating
environmental factors that are known to be stressful
or have negative impacts on outcomes, such as loud
noises, lack of windows, multiple patients in one room,
hard looring materials (e.g., vinyl or linoleum), and
poor indoor air quality. In addition to eliminating or
reducing negative factors, supportive design employs
“the inclusion of characteristics and opportunities in the
environment that research indicates can calm patients,
reduce stress, and strengthen coping resources and
healthful processes by fostering control, including
privacy; promoting social support; and providing access
to nature and other positive distractions”(pg. 54). These
include art, soothing music, and plants, gardens and
nature views. Schweitzer, Gilpin, & Frampton (2004) in
theirreviewoftheresearchonelementsofenvironmental
design that make an impact on health outcomes arrive at
similar conclusions.
Evans and McCoy (1998) describe ive dimensions of the
designed environment, primarily architectural, that could
afect human health by altering stress levels, which they
label as stimulation, coherence, afordances, control, and
restorative. They list a number of interior design factors
for each dimension that can impact stress, but do not
provide recommendations for interior design solutions
or approaches.
Evans (2003) reviewed research on the physical
environment and mental health and found the mental
health of psychiatric patients has been linked to design
elements that afect their ability to regulate social
interaction. In additional, crowding and loud noises were
found to elevate psychological distress, although they do
not negatively impact mental health.
Heulat (2002) presents a holistic approach to designing
healing environments that takes into consideration
the physical, psychological and spiritual needs of
occupants. Along similar lines, Felgen (2004) outlines the
characteristics of what she calls“therapeutic care,”which
Healing Environments

25
including being conscientious of the impact of the
physical environment on those being cared for. Based on
her review of research on healing environments, van den
Berg draws a distinction between design interventions
that promote healing (e.g., nature views, noise reduction)
and those that make interior spaces healthy (e.g., indoor
air quality, sinks and hand cleaner dispensers). Contrary
to Ulrich (1991; 1999) as well as Lewis (1994), she inds
weak or inconclusive evidence that daylighting, indoor
plants, or gardens contribute to healing.
Central to the design of facilities for the homeless is
the concept of home (Finley & Barton, 2003). Homeless
individuals and families not only lack permanent shelter,
theyalsolackthepsychologicalandemotionalconnection
to place that is fundamental to our sense of identity and
well-being – what has been called “placelessness.” Cross
(2001) deines placelessness as “a lack of place-based
identiication and a lack of emotional attachments to
particular places” (pg. 12). What distinguishes homeless
individuals from individuals who are mobile by choice
is that the latter have a mobile sense of “home” and can
cultivate a sense of home wherever they are, whereas in
placelessness people do not have an articulated or place-
based sense of home. They are cut of from any ties to a
community or sense of belonging.
Poirier (1998), and to some extent Pable (2005), proposes
that Maslow’s Hierarchy of Preponent Needs can be a
useful tool for increasing residents’satisfaction by taking
into account their basic needs. These include such
factors as physiological needs (lighting, sound, thermal
environment, and mobility) as well as the need for safety,
belongingness, self-esteem, and self-actualization.
In setting forth the characteristics of human ecology
theory,BublozandSontag(1999)arguethatcommunities
should address the full range of needs as a holistic
ecosystem encompassing the natural, built and socially
constructed environment, including biological-physical
sustenance, economic maintenance, and psychosocial
and nurturance functions. They posit that the family is
the principle social unit and thus fundamental to our
concept of home and community.
Dovey(1985)addressesanumberofdesignconsiderations
essential to establishing a sense of “home” within the
built environment, such as properties of “home” (order,
including spatial order; identity, including spatial
identity; connectedness; and dialectics, including spatial
dialectics), that can inform designing environments for
the homeless.
Walsh, et al. found that women are less likely than men to
use homeless shelters because shelters typically do not
conform to their idea of home. The homeless women
they interviewed“stressed that home is a place of refuge
from the outside world, a sanctuary that functions as a
foundation allowing for fulilling potential”(pg. 308). The
needforprivacy,particularlyabedroomwheretheycould
be alone, was of primary importance. “Furthermore, the
ability to cook, entertain, and pursue leisure activities
Home & Sense of Place

26
were identiied by study participants as freedoms that
help make a place feel like home” (pg. 308). The study
provides a number of recommendations for the location
and design of shelters to make them more suitable
for women, based on a deined set of criteria for what
constitutes a sense of“home.” Among others:“Physically,
home is quiet, clean, and structured. Amenities such
as a telephone, working appliances, a refrigerator, heat
and hot water, a front door, and adequate living space
were all identiied by the participants as basic needs that
are critical for a place to even begin to feel like home.
In particular, it was important to the women to have a
door to be able to close to contain themselves in their
own space and to open to include those of their own
choosing. They indicated that the space should provide
facilities to do laundry and keep themselves clean” (pg.
307). Women especially prefer having fewer individuals
per bedroom.
Elias and Inui (1993) in their study of chronically older
homeless men note that social meaning of shelter among
older homeless persons has attributes similar to that of
home among domiciled older persons, suggesting these
attributes may be associated primarily with the aging
process.
In their work with homeless youth, Penui and Davey
discovered that the degree to which young residents felt
“at home” in a shelter was contingent on their previous
experiences of home and their ideation of “home.”
Zavotka and Teaford report a similar inding from their
study of older adults in assisted living facilities. Using
a Social Space Attachment Model, they showed that
personal attachment to new surroundings occurs when
the interior space is similar in purpose and visual stimuli
to a resident’s previous home environment. By the same
token, Burlingham, et al. (2010) report that negative
associations with home from their childhood or youth
made alcoholic homeless women reluctant and fearful to
enter shelters.
On the other hand, as Davis (2004) and Kratzer point out,
staf and administrators do not want residents to regard
a facility as their “home,” as that is counterproductive to
breaking the cycle of homelessness and helping them
transition to more permanent housing.
Life on the streets is chaotic. In contrast, as Walsh, et
al. state, “Physically, home is quiet, clean, structured.”
Pothukuchi reports that residents living in working
women’s hostels ranked cleanliness and maintenance
high among the factors they deemed important to a
good quality of life.
Facilities need to be aesthetically pleasing – not
institutionally sparse – but visual complexity should be
kept to a minimum (Orth and Wirtz). Providing an orderly
environment that appears clean, well organized, and well
maintained instills conidence and trust, has a calming
inluence, and encourages individuals awaiting services
to be patient (Bitner). Staf and volunteers should avoid
clutter, piles of paperwork or other stacks of boxes
or supplies that may prove distracting or irritating to
residents or clients (Davis, 1984).
Order and Arrangement

27
Maintaining order can be a challenge for staf and
volunteers. Facilities are crowded, and usually there are
long lines of individuals waiting for intake or counseling.
Neale and Stevenson (2013) in their study of homeless
drug users state that in addition to complaining about
the need for cleaner, more orderly facilities in shelters
and hostels, the participants highlighted the need for
more behavioral structures and boundaries.
Pable (2005) mentions that one recommendation given
by residents and staf she interviewed was to ofer an
ironclad way of keeping one’s place in line that does not
necessarily require physically standing in it. Davis (2004)
suggests several diferent strategies for the design of
reception areas to assist with crowd control and long
waits.
Furniturearrangementhasbeenshowntohaveanimpact
on behavior. Davis (1984) relates, “The arrangement of
seating not only inluences where people sit but afects
the character of the interaction that can occur”(pg. 273).
For example, sitting face-to-face across a desk or table
may be perceived as confrontational, whereas sitting
corner to corner invites conversation and interaction.
Evans (2003) and Baldwin (1985) report that seating can
be arranged to increase socialization, which can be a
challenge for homeless individuals but is mentioned as
an important beneit of being in a shelter and a means of
developing social networks to support transitioning into
more permanent housing (Grunberg & Eagle, 1990).
Another tip Pable (2005) received was to strategically
orient seating so users are facing out from sheltering
walls. This will help to increase their sense of safety and
reduce stress.
Along with personal control and safety, privacy is the
characteristic most often cited in the literature as being
of utmost importance to residents. Privacy relates to
independence, autonomy, dignity and identity, but also
to safety, stress reduction, and healing. Because they
have limited space and high density, shelters ofer little
privacy. Designers need to be creative and resourceful
to help ensure residents have at minimum some level of
perceived privacy.
In designing dorm stations for a shelter, Kratzer relates
that residents expressed during the programming phase
their desire for a place in the shelter that was private
and “theirs” – a place they could be responsible for.
Walsh, et al. and Burlingham, et al. each report that the
women they interviewed spoke of the need for privacy,
particularly a bedroom where they could be alone, with
a door they could lock. The subjects in Pable’s (2012)
design intervention study also expressed the need for
greater privacy and control of their privacy. In addition
to putting a lock on the door, Pable added bed curtains
to provide more personal control over privacy for the
parents in her study.
Kratzer states that the ability to create opportunities for
privacy while allowing sightlines and visibility for safety
Privacy

28
created the most obvious design dilemma for his project
and his student designers. The inal station solution
was a plastic and steel system comprised of three
components that can be detached and reconigured
in a variety of modular arrangements – a headboard, a
side privacy panel, and a circular privacy end unit. Davis
(2004) provides several diferent strategies for increasing
privacy or perceived privacy while not interfering with
staf’s need to monitor residents.
Concerning the privacy needs of staf and service
providers, Chia and Grossberg echo Kratzer, “Perhaps
the most pressing issue faced by small-scale homeless
service providers is the need to engage in very private
interactions in very public spaces. In the case of the
clinic, patient histories, physical exams and diagnoses all
take place in one open room, where limsy screens and
a noisy environment serve as the only bufers ofering
any sense of privacy. On the other hand, the clinic’s open
model maintains visual connections among staf, doctors
and patients at all times, creating a less intimidating
environment for patients. Building openness and privacy
simultaneously is one of the main design challenges of
the project.”
For homeless individuals and families, and especially
for those who have experienced trauma, safety is their
foremost concern when entering a shelter or service
environment (Bloom & Farragher; Fallott & Harris;
Schweber, 2015). This is especially true for women and
transgender individuals (Burlingham, et al.; Mottet &
Ohle) and homeless veterans (Desai, Harpaz-Rotem,
Najavits, & Rosenheck, 2008).
Safety involves both physical safety (protection from
violenceandphysicalandsexualabuse)andpsychological
safety (protection from emotional and verbal abuse
and institutional or arbitrary authority). Christian and
Abrams (2003) found that homeless individuals were
more likely to use social services if they felt providers
did not stigmatize them and were “on their side” rather
than on the side of authority. Hofman and Cofey relate
that the homeless individuals they interviewed chose to
drop out the social service system altogether rather than
be subjected to what they perceived as verbal abuse
by providers (2008). Bridgman (2003) observed that
allowing women to come and go as they wished and to
decide when they wanted services created a sense of a
safer environment.
Fear for physical safety ranges from unwanted social
interaction or touching, to theft of personal property,
to hands-on violence or abuse. Along with setting
behavioral boundaries, shelters need to provide physical
boundaries. Privacy, protection and freedom from
harassment necessitate the setting of boundaries to
prevent intrusion (Anderson, Gannon, & Kalchik, 2013).
Neale and Stevenson note that subjects in their study
speciied the need for“safe and defensible”spaces. Pable
(2005) was advised, for reasons of safety, to strategically
orient seating so users are facing out from sheltering
walls. As discussed above, in several studies, subjects,
Safety and Security

29
especially women, pointed out the importance of having
a sleeping space with a door they could lock. Separate
sleeping and showering areas should be provided for
single men, single women, and families (Davis, 2004) and
for transgender individuals (Mottet and Ohlem date).
To help ensure safety, staf needs to be able to monitor
residents. Davis (2004) suggests using low partitions and
a combination of wall lighting and indirect lighting in the
design of sleeping areas to accommodate the needs of
both staf and residents (pp. 91-97). Bud Clark Commons
was designed so that there are no dark corners or ends
of hallways and no partial walls, partitions or other
structures for individuals to hide behind (Berens, 2014).
Stamps (2005) conducted several studies on visual
permeability and perceived levels of safety. Among
other indings, more open spaces correlated with greater
sense of safety; other inluences afecting perceived
sense of safety may be distances, possible hiding places,
and lighting; locating a gap in the middle of a wall made
the room feel more open and safer, while small amounts
of gap made the room seem more enclosed and unsafe;
visual permeability inluenced impressions of enclosure:
more visibility meant more openness, regardless of
whether one could move through a boundary.
In Fallot and Harris’ self-assessment tool for creating
cultures of trauma-informed care, the section on safety
includes a number of physical environmental factors to
consider, such as: Where are services delivered? What
signs are there? Are they welcoming? Clear? Legible? Are
doors locked or open? Are there easily accessible exits?
How would you describe the reception and waiting areas,
interview rooms, etc.? Are they comfortable and inviting?
Are restrooms easily accessible?
How space is laid out in the entire facility and within
areas of the facility can have a signiicant impact on
individuals’mood and behavior. So does the perception
of space, which is afected by the design of the physical
environment.
As already mentioned, if the space is perceived as open,
with clear sightlines and no barriers, it will increase the
sense of safety (Stamps, 2005) as well as that of “spatial
availability,”which mitigates perceived sense of crowding
(Baum, 1976). In his review of the implications of spatial
research on interior spaces, Evans (1979) inds that
perceived comfort is related to spatial perception and
can be afected individual characteristics, interpersonal
situations, and social settings. He also mentions the link
between spatial dimensions, perceived crowding and
stress, as does Vischer (2007).
Based on his review of research, Raybeck states that the
structure of the environment, including shape, size, and
amount and location of both ixed and moveable objects,
and paths of ingress and egress can markedly inluence
both the perception of the environment by its occupants
and patterns of interaction between them. Curved walls,
he found, should be avoided (1991).
Spatial Layout / Perceptions of
Space

30
Gotham and Brumley (2002) describe strategies by which
residents in a public housing complex “use space” to
provide a measure of security and protection. By sitting
in the doorways of their apartments to survey courtyards
where their children play they are able to create safe
spaces, free of criminal activity and drug use. They avoid
spaces identiied as“hot,”where such activity takes place,
and are able to do so because there are streets with
unobstructed sight lines and boundaries that provide
safe spaces for them to walk. Similar types of behavior
occur among residents in shelters.
Anderson (1997) adopted the metaphor of a street in the
form of a lengthy arcade with lanes set perpendicular to
conigure a facility for the homeless as a way of providing
a sense of “image congruity” and “social imageability”
that residents could relate to. Residents and staf have
credited the success of the facility in part to the open
design and large amount of common space in the design,
which invites socialization.
Similarly, Anantha, who compared spatial perceptions in
“low-crowded”and“high-crowded”interiorenvironments
(banks), concluded that more open spaces alleviate the
sense of crowding; however, they are not always feasible
due to building constraints. Two other strategies,
increasing partitioning and decreasing illumination, also
were efective in reducing perceptions of crowding and
the resulting sense of stress and discomfort.
Davis (2004) ofers several strategies for the layout of
dormitories, such as creating corridors or lanes rather
than using open space or have rows of beds facing each
other in a long hallway, to increase a sense of privacy and
reduce perceived crowdedness.
To balance the need for privacy and concentration
with the need to monitor individuals and encourage
interaction, Thompson (2015) rearranged the spatial
layout of an existing interior design studio on campus
to a U shape, which made it possible to remove high
privacy walls while maintaining a sense of boundaries
and personal distance.
Individuals and families who are homeless are likely
to have experienced some form of previous trauma;
homelessness itself can be viewed as a traumatic
experience; and being homeless increases the risk of
further victimization and retraumatization (Hopper,
Bassuk, & Olivet, 2010). These individuals are highly
vulnerable and will avoid shelters, transitional housing or
other types of services if they feel they are not safe and
supportive (Desai, et al.; LaGory, Fitzpatrick, & Richey,
1990).
Much of the literature on providing services to
traumatized individuals focuses on the interaction
between the provider and the client. Several models of
trauma-informed care (TIC) have been profered (e.g.,
Bloom & Farragher; Elliott, et al.; Fallott & Harris), but all
are founded upon the same basic principles: ensure the
individual feels safe; “do no harm” (i.e., avoid deepening
the trauma or retraumatizing the client), and respect
individual, gender and cultural diferences.
Trauma

31
No individual studies of the impact of the physical
environment on traumatized individuals was found
in this review, although many of the issues already
discussed (control, gender preferences, privacy, security)
apply to clients who are traumatized or have experienced
trauma. Assessment tools for creating trauma-informed
care and organizational cultures include measures
of ensuring the physical safety of clients that refer to
the built environment, such as lighting, privacy, locks
for bathroom and places to store belongings, and a
place for children to play (Center for Substance Abuse
Treatment, 2014; Fallott & Harris; National Center on
Family Homelessness; SAMSA; Women’s Bureau, 2014).
Guthrie and O’Donnell list privacy, noise control, choice
ofseating,easyexit,signage,accessibility,anddecoration
as important components of environmental safety in
providing trauma-informed care for veterans.
Wayinding is an important element in the design of
facilities for the homeless for several reasons. Facilities
are by nature temporary, thus residents or clients often
are not familiar with their layout and the location of
needed facilities or services. Clients are often fearful and
disoriented, and therefore less aware of their physical
surroundings. Many shelters and hostels only provide
services at night, so interiors are often dimly lit. (Davis,
2004).
Wayinding is a topic that has generated a considerable
body of environmental research. Much of the research
focuses on the architectural design of the built space
(e.g., loor layout and orientation, placement of stairwells
and elevators) and the use of architectural elements
(e.g., columns, intersections, doorways) as landmarks.
However, some studies do address elements in the
interior environment that can aid in wayinding and
egress in the event of an emergency.
After reviewing the research on wayinding and spatial
orientation, Gärling, Böök, & Lindberg (1986) report the
indings conirm that individuals who are new to a space
have the most diiculty with orienting themselves and
thus have the greatest need for signage. They note,
however, that in highly complex environments signage
alone may not be suicient – a conclusion that has
been reairmed in a number of other studies (Lawton,
1996; Murphy, 2012; O’Neill, 1991; Rook, Tzortzopoulos,
Koskela, & Rook, 2009).
In addition to signage, the presence of easily identiiable
anddescribablelandmarks(Jung&Gibson,2007;Lawton,
1996) has been found to improve wayinding and speed
of egress. Murphy and Rook, et al., advocate“embedding”
multiple cues for orientation and egress in the interior
environment, including the use of prominent landmarks,
color, features of the buildings and environment that
allow for an intuitive performance of activities without
reliance on signs, and the strategic placement graphical
information in such a way that it is in agreement with the
architectural layout of the environment.
Color is frequently used as an orientation strategy.
Obediat, Obediat, & Amor (2011) determined that color
was efective as an orientation and wayinding cue when
Wayinding

32
used to help distinguish landmarks and when used as a
color-coding system, not just as decoration. Hidayetoglu,
Yildrim, & Akalin (2012) studied whether warm colors
or cool colors and high lighting levels or low lighting
levels were more efective for wayinding. Their results
show subjects were more likely to remember locations
associated with warm colors, but that low levels of
lighting could negatively mitigate the ability of subjects
to wayind based on color remembrance.
Spatial layout of loors also has been found to afect
wayinding. Hölscher, et al. (2006) ofered subjects
several diferent wayinding strategies (central point,
horizontal point, and vertical point) to exit a multi-level
building. Overall, subjects favored the loor strategy,
orienting themselves vertically. Werner and Schindler
(2004) examined how the geometry of spatial layouts
afected subjects ability to wayind and concluded
that orientation of diferent parts of a building can be
an important factor in wayinding performance and
therefore in the usability and the positive experience
of a space. They found that misalignment of expected
patterns of geometrical orientation led to a deterioration
of wayinding speed and accuracy. Similarly, in observing
the behavior of patrons in a public library, Maudel (2013)
discovered no deinite pattern in the routes they took
each time they used the library, but did ind that paths
which more directly connected one node of the library
to another node (i.e., via a straight line) were used more
often.
Lawton and Kallai (2002) showed that people of diferent
gendersanddiferentcultureshavediferentorientations,
preferences and levels of anxiety about wayinding.
Hidayetoglu, et al. also found that the females in their
study preferred higher brightness levels than did the
males.

33
AREAS FOR FURTHER
RESEARCH
As is evident from the foregoing review, little research
has been conducted to date on the efects of the interior
built environment on the homeless. Some qualitative
data is available from studies of the homeless in which
the physical environment was not the principle focus of
the research. Other studies have examined the efects of
the built environment on occupants, but their focus was
not on the homeless.
An argument can be made that practitioners do not need
a great deal more primary research in order to improve
the interiors of existing facilities and those have yet to
be built. Evidence from other ields or design specialties
provides basic guidance on ways to address issues in the
physical environment that afect behavior, mood, health
and well-being, as well as gender and cultural diferences
and, more speciically, the special needs of individuals
who are traumatized, have some form of mental illness
or debility, or abuse alcohol, drugs or other substances.
In addition, designers can consult case studies and post-
occupancy evaluations to see what strategies, solutions
and interventions their peers have integrated into their
projects.
Given that resources are limited and the need to provide
services to the homeless is great, funding for research on
the efects of the interior environment on the homeless
is likely to be scarce. That said, this review reveals some
areas where further research would be beneicial to
practitioners and to facility managers and administrators.
They are, in no particular order:
• Materials: In general, materiality is an area on which
almostnopeer-reviewedresearchhasbeendoneasit
relates to the efects of materials on occupants, other
than chemical composition and possible toxicity.
Research is needed on durability, comfort, ease of
maintenance, noise abatement, and sustainability.
What types of materials would be best to use for
looring, wallcoverings, window treatments? The
research that exists applies mainly to healthcare
environments, which have their own set of special
needs.
• Plants and Nature Views: It is assumed that the
homeless have the same biophilic need to connect
to nature as those with a permanent residence. Does
their experience with life on the streets alter their
perception and relationship to nature? Are plants
comforting or distracting for them? Do plants help to
improve indoor air quality and other wellness factors
in shelters and other facilities? If so, what varieties
and at what levels?

34
• Use of Space: Are there more efective and eicient
ways to design the interiors of shelters and other
facilities so as to maximize available space? Would
more lexible or adaptable designs facilitate better
delivery of services and free up funds to improve the
aesthetics and visual environment?
• Visual Complexity: Research shows that some level
of visual complexity is beneicial as a distraction
from perceived crowding and reducer of stress and
anxiety. Other research shows that too much visual
complexity can increase stress and stimulate arousal,
as well as create a negative impression of the space
and the service providers who operate within it. Is
there a happy medium, and, if so, what types of visual
complexity are viewed as welcome and what types
are viewed as irritating or distracting?
• Shelterization and Dependence: Facility
administrators and managers worry that making
facilities too attractive and comfortable for
residents is counterproductive in that it may
become a disincentive for residents to leave the
facility and transition to more permanent housing.
This assumption has not been objectively tested.
Some existing research indicates that the physical
environment has minimal impact on whether
residents stay and/or return to a facility, whereas self-
esteem, self-reliance and having a supportive social
network appear to have a major impact.
• Behavioral Control and Boundaries: What are optimal
design solutions to balance the need to create an
environment that reinforces the need for orderly,
respectful behavior and the need for residents to feel
their independence and ability to choose are being
safeguarded? What types of visual and/or physical
boundaries are efective without being intrusive or
perceived as authoritative?

35
DESIGN GUIDELINES AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Thefollowingdesignguidelines,tips,andrecommendations
havebeenculledfromtheliteraturereviewedforthisreport.
Clarke sets forth some general guidelines for the design
of healthcare environments which apply equally as well
to facilities for the homeless:
• Reduce or remove known adverse stimuli
• Reduce or remove environmental stressors
• Engage the individual actively in a dynamic, multi-
sensory environment
• Provide ways for the individual to exhibit their self-
reliance (ability to do things for himself or herself)
• Provide and promote connectedness to the natural
world
• Separate the individual from others who may be in
distress
• Reinforce the individual’s sense of personal identity
• Promote the opportunity for choice
Art can create a visual distraction that helps to alleviate
stress, as well as improve mood, comfort and customer
satisfaction. Attention should be paid so that the art
does not convey meaning or symbolic signiicance that
would generate or arouse negative feelings.
Color can have a profound efect on residents’ mood.
Avoid sterile, institutional-looking colors or deeply
hued warm colors (red, orange, yellow) that may arouse
negative emotions. Lighter-colored rooms are perceived
as more open, less crowded (“spatially available”), and
thus safer and more calming. Color can be an important
wayinding device if used systematically to convey
information about the location of rooms or services.
Furniture needs to be durable and easy to clean.
Patterned fabric is easier to keep clean than solids.
Some solid wood and laminated products designed
for shelter use are available. Uninished wood should
not be used for beds as bedbugs can burrow into the
wood and be impossible to eradicate. Beds should
not look institutional. Arrangement of furniture needs
to be considered for how it afects residents’ sense of
safety, perceived crowdedness, and relationship to staf
(e.g., communicative or authoritative). In waiting or
common areas, orient seating so users are facing out
from sheltering walls. Allowing residents to rearrange
a chair or other small pieces of furniture enhances their
sense of control and independence. Avoid furniture that
provides accessible drawers where items can be hidden
or secretively transferred to others.

36
Intake and reception areas should be open and
welcoming, with visual cues and signage that indicate
where lines form and where facilities and service areas
are located.
Lighting and daylighting afect perception of
crowding, which relates to stress and discomfort. Rooms
withmorenaturallightappearlesscrowded. Lowerlevels
of illumination also can mitigate perceived crowding
(such as in a dormitory), but also impede wayinding.Wall
lighting and indirect lighting in dormitories is preferable
to ambient lighting. Giving residents control over task
lighting, such as a reading lamp, enhances their sense of
independence and autonomy.
Locks on room doors or sleeping compartments, and
bathrooms in shared housing situations, if possible, and
storage units increase a sense of safety and control.
Noise abatement strategies, such as using
carpeting on the loor and wallcoverings, should be
employed to reduce stress and provide a quiet, relaxed
atmosphere where residents can rest or sleep. As in
healthcare settings, maintenance issues usually require
some trade-of between ease of maintenance and noise
reduction.
Plants can be both decorative and salutary. Research
shows that settings that include vegetation reduce stress,
promote peace, tranquility, enhanced self-esteem, and a
sense of mastery of the environment.
Showers, sinks and toilet facilities should be
easy to maintain. Separate areas should be available for
single men, single women and families, and transgender
individuals.
Signage helps reduce stress and disorientation and
facilitates wayinding.
Spatial layouts should be simple, linear and easy
to navigate. Breaking up space in dormitories to form
smaller units, instead of one large open plan or parallel
corridors, enhances the sense of privacy and safety.
Storage spaces with locks are essential. Sleeping
areas preferably should have lockable storage
compartments for belongings as well as a closet tall
enough to hang a shirt, trousers, a dress or skirt.
Visual bufers, such as partitions, screens or curtains,
can help create a sense of privacy. However, avoid visual
barriers, such as panels, dead ends in hallways, unlit
areas, etc., where someone could hide. Strive for visual
permeability. Sight lines should be unobstructed as
much as possible to reduce perceived crowded and
stress. A mid-sized gap in a wall can make a room feel
less crowded and safer.
Visual interest can serve as a distraction from
perceived crowding and stress, but too much visual
complexity can increase stress and anxiety.
Waiting and play areas help to alleviate stress,
especially for homeless parents who need to conduct
businessandkeepaneyeontheirchildren. Ifspaceallows,
include both a quiet room and a room for conversation.

37
DESIGNING FOR HOMELESSNESS:
A SELECT ANNOTATED
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Acosta, O., & Toro, P. A. (2000). Let’s ask the homeless
people themselves: A needs assessment based on
a probability sample of adults. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 28(3), 343-366.
“A probability sample of 301 homeless adults from Bufalo,
NY, was followed over 6 months to document the utilization
ofavarietyofcommunityservices,examineservicesdesired,
and identify factors associated with service utilization,
preference, and satisfaction. The following needs were all
ratedasatleastequallyimportantastheneedforafordable
housing: safety, education, transportation, medical/dental
treatment,andjobtraining/placement(mostoftheseneeds
were also rated as diicult to obtain). Needs for formal
mental health and substance abuse services were rated as
relatively unimportant and easy to obtain, and for those
whoactuallyusedthem,respondentswereoftendissatisied
with them.” In conclusion, the authors observe, “Examining
the discrepancy between importance and diiculty ratings
suggests a mismatch between what homeless persons
perceive as critical areas of need and what service agencies
maybeproviding.”Thestudydoesnotaddressthecondition
of shelters or afordable housing.
Anderson, R. (1997). Street as metaphor in housing for the
homeless. Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless,
6(1), 1-12.
This paper presents preliminary indings from research-
in-progress on the development of StreetCity, nonproit
shared housing for the chronically homeless in Toronto. By
far the greatest part of StreetCity is given over to public and
semipublic space. An arcade, or wide interior corridor, the
“Main Street,” as it is known, runs the entire length of the
middle building. Smaller corridors run at right angles from
the main corridor. The street ofers those who have been
homeless “image congruity” and “social imageability”; it is
a setting that conveys vivid and socially relevant meanings
to its users. “The open design of the building and large
amount of common space have been credited by both
Homelessness - General

38
residentsandstafaspartofthesuccessoftheproject.”Some
residents have said what they don’t want is the “isolation of
ordinary apartment living,” while those who wish to move
to more permanent housing prefer self-contained housing.
Bubolz, M. M., & Sontag, M. S. (1993). Human ecology
theory. In Doherty, W.J. (Ed.), Sourcebook of family
theories and methods: A contextual approach (pp. 419-
450). New York: Springer US.
“Human ecology theory is unique in its focus on humans as
both biological organisms and social beings in interaction
with their environment.” The authors focus on the family as
the principle social unit, but the theory has applicability to
any group situation and the need to address the full range
of needs as a holistic ecosystem encompassing the natural,
built and socially constructed environment, including
biological-physical sustenance, economic maintenance,
and psychosocial and nurturance functions.
Cross,J.E.(2001).Whatissenseofplace?InArchivesofthe
Twelfth Headwaters Conference. Gunnison, CO: Western
State Colorado University. Found at http://western.edu/
sites/default/iles/documents/cross_headwatersXII.pdf
The author discusses two diferent aspects of the concept
senseofplace.Theirstaspect,relationshiptoplace,consists
of the ways that people relate to places, or the types of
bonds we have with places. The second aspect, community
attachment,consistsofthedepthandtypesof attachments
to one particular place.
Dovey, K. (1985). Home and homelessness. In Home
environments (pp. 33-64). New York, NY: Springer US.
The author uses the term “homelessness” to describe
the lack or erosion of a sense of “home” (vs. a house), not
the phenomena of individuals without a place to live.
Nonetheless, the article addresses a number of design
considerations essential to establishing a sense of “home”
within the built environment, such as properties of “home”
(order, including spatial order; identity, including spatial
identity; connectedness; and dialectics, including spatial
dialectics), that can inform designing environments for the
homeless.
EbscoHost Connection. Citations with the tag:
HOMELESS shelters. http://connection.ebscohost.com/
tag/HOMELESS%20shelters&ofset=0
An extensive list of articles on all aspects of homelessness
housed by EbscoHost.
Finley, S., & Barton, S. C. (2003). The power of space:
constructing a dialog of resistance, transformation, and
homelessness. Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(4),
483–487.
The article summarizes the contributions to a special
issue of the journal on homelessness. The purpose of
this special issue is threefold: (1) to challenge standard
conceptions of homelessness in order to open up new ways
of understanding how and why homelessness proliferates
in Western society; (2) to demonstrate the power of place in
the lives of unhoused individuals in their (and our) eforts to
imagine new social relations and ways of being in a world
understood and described primarily by the kinds of material
and social capital not aforded to those in homeless

39
situations; and (3) to share stories of lives in distressed
housinginmultipleformsasawaytoincreasethepossibility
of bringing the lives of homeless individuals into the core of
our conversations in educational research.
Grunberg, J., & Eagle, P.F. (1990). Shelterization: How the
homeless adapt to shelter living. Psychiatric Services,
41(5), 521-525.
Despite dangerousness and depersonalization in the
shelter, residents to do not lee the building. Instead, they
stay and develop coping strategies that provide them with
a feeling of mastery unparalleled outside the shelter. A
strategy that may ameliorate the process of “shelterization”
includes the establishment of positive social networks and
the promotion of ailiations between the homeless and
social service and mental health providers.
Hulchanski, J.D., Campsie, P., Chau, S.B.Y., Hwang, S.W.,
& Paradis, E., eds. (2009). Finding Home: Policy Options
for Addressing Homelessness in Canada. Toronto:
University of Toronto. Found at www.homelesshub.ca/
FindingHome
Examines a variety of housing and policy options for the
homeless, including chapters on transitional housing and
shelters. The authors review research on the suitability
of each housing type for particular populations but not
speciics of design.
La Gory, M., Fitzpatrick, K., & Ritchey, F. (1990). Homeless
persons: Diferences between those living on the street
and in shelters. Sociology and Social Research, 74(3),
163-167.
The authors interviewed 150 homeless persons, some
who live in shelters and some who live on the street. They
found that, while individuals may move in and out of each
environment at diferent times, shelter users are more likely
to be women, better educated, socially ailiated, and have
experienced greater vulnerability in the past. Street users
were more dissatisied with their living arrangements and
craved more autonomy than found in the shelters.
National Alliance to End Homelessness. (2015). The
State of Homelessness in America 2015: An examination
of trends in homelessness, homelessness assistance,
and at-risk populations at the national and state levels.
Washington, D.C.: National Alliance to End Homelessness.
This report is intended to serve as a desktop reference
for policymakers, journalists, and community and state
leaders. Chapter 1 details national and state trends in the
overall homeless population and subpopulations, including
individuals, families, and veterans. Chapter 2 presents
trends in populations at-risk of homelessness, including
households experienc¬ing severe housing cost burden and
people living doubled up with family and friends. Chapter
3 analyzes the types and scope of assistance available to
people experiencing homelessness and utilization of those
resources.
Oice of Community Planning and Development, HUD.
(2014). The 2014 annual homeless assessment report
(AHAR) to Congress. Parts 1 & 2. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development.

A REVIEW OF RESEARCH DESIGNING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR RECOVERY FROM HOMELESSNESS

A REVIEW OF RESEARCH DESIGNING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR RECOVERY FROM HOMELESSNESS

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to A REVIEW OF RESEARCH DESIGNING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR RECOVERY FROM HOMELESSNESS

Similar to A REVIEW OF RESEARCH DESIGNING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR RECOVERY FROM HOMELESSNESS (20)

More from Don Dooley

More from Don Dooley (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A REVIEW OF RESEARCH DESIGNING THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT FOR RECOVERY FROM HOMELESSNESS